LAPD officers shot and killed a robbery suspect on live local TV yesterday, after a 90-minute chase that was itself broadcast live. The deck of this LA Times piece notes wanly that the incident "revives debate over broadcast of police pursuits." But the tut-tutting doesn't really wash, for at least three reasons. One: I live about half a mile from where the shooting took place, and the amount of increased debate it's fueled has been -- Oh, wait: None. (Note to the LAT: Writing a deck that refers to "debate" does not itself constitute debate.) Two: The broadcast was actually, on its own disturbing terms, a home run for local stations, because it gave viewers exactly what the stations yearn for every time they air live coverage of police chases -- actual death, live on TV. (Come on, if that isn't what they're hoping for, please tell me what is. Either some poor pedestrian gets mashed into guacamole or the malefactor himself crashes, or better yet, goes out in a hail of bullets.) Three: The LAT acts in effect as an adjunct, even an amplifier to the local stations, offering a sidebar link to KTLA footage of the shooting. The KTLA stream, by the way, makes you sit through a commercial before you get to the footage. This goes beyond disingenuousness into some realm of quasi-journalistic shame that's so creepy I hardly know where to begin disapproving of it.
February 24, 2004
Bill Barol
I'm a freelance writer in Santa Monica, Ca. But what I really want to do is not get paid for blogging.
Too bad the cops couldn't have sent in Chris Erskine as some kind of human shield...
Posted by: tina | February 24, 2004 at 08:07 PM